The duties of candour: what do they mean to paediatricians?

Toby Reynolds,Deirdre Kelly

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2014-308159

2016-01-04

Archives of Disease in Childhood

Abstract:Although the new guidance may appear daunting, health professionals should be reassured that it intends to support and strengthen their professional practice and create a more open culture to improve transparency and patient care

pediatrics

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Admitting when Mistakes Are Made

Nigel Hawkes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h4474

2015-01-01

Abstract:Nigel Hawkes explains the statutory duty of candour A statutory duty of candour came into force for hospital trusts in November 20141 and for primary care, private healthcare, and social care providers on 1 April this year.2 New guidance has also recently been published to help individual healthcare professionals to know when they should admit mistakes. Among the results of the Francis report into the failings at Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust was the introduction of a statutory duty of candour aimed at obliging NHS organisations in England to be open and honest with patients when things go wrong. The law applies to organisations, not individuals. Breaches are a criminal offence, which can be punished by fines, but the real damage is reputational. Breaches do not depend on the degree of harm a patient may have suffered: the offence is to have breached the regulations. This is akin to driving at 100 mph on a motorway, which is an offence even if no accident occurred. Yes. A professional duty of candour has existed for many years and is enforceable by the General Medical Council. The GMC and the Nursing and Midwifery Council recently issued new guidance on what this means in practice.3 Critics such as Action against Medical Accidents (AvMA) argue that this obligation was ineffective because the GMC was inconsistent in enforcing it, and doctors were under pressure from hospital management not to speak out. “Doctors were told, ‘Don’t say anything about it’ when things went wrong,” says Peter Walsh, chief executive of AvMA. “It put them in an impossible position.” Not quite. The thresholds for action in the two systems are different. The statutory code covers “notifiable safety incidents,” defined by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) as those causing death, severe harm, moderate harm, or …
ISPAD Clinical Practice Consensus Guidelines 2018: The delivery of ambulatory diabetes care to children and adolescents with diabetes

Catherine Pihoker,Gun Forsander,Bereket Fantahun,Anju Virmani,Sarah Corathers,Paul Benitez-Aguirre,Junfen Fu,David M. Maahs

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/pedi.12757

2018-01-01

Pediatric Diabetes

Abstract:Pediatric DiabetesVolume 19, Issue S27 p. 84-104 ISPAD Clinical Practice Consensus Guidelines ISPAD Clinical Practice Consensus Guidelines 2018: The delivery of ambulatory diabetes care to children and adolescents with diabetes Catherine Pihoker, Corresponding Author Catherine Pihoker catherine.pihoker@seattlechildrens.org Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington Correspondence Catherine Pihoker, Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington, 4800 Sand Point Way NE, Seattle, WA 98105, M/S OC.7.820. Email: catherine.pihoker@seattlechildrens.orgSearch for more papers by this authorGun Forsander, Gun Forsander Division of Diabetes, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg and The Queen Silvia Children's Hospital, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, SwedenSearch for more papers by this authorBereket Fantahun, Bereket Fantahun Department of Pediatrics and Child Health at Saint Paul's Hospital Millennium Medical College, Addis Ababa, EthiopiaSearch for more papers by this authorAnju Virmani, Anju Virmani Department of Pediatrics, Max, Pentamed and SL Jain Hospitals, Delhi, IndiaSearch for more papers by this authorSarah Corathers, Sarah Corathers Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OhioSearch for more papers by this authorPaul Benitez-Aguirre, Paul Benitez-Aguirre Sydney Medical School, Discipline of Child & Adolescent Health, The Children's Hospital at Westmead Clinical School Children's Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this authorJunfen Fu, Junfen Fu Children's Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorDavid M. Maahs, David M. Maahs orcid.org/0000-0002-4602-7909 Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University, Stanford, CaliforniaSearch for more papers by this author Catherine Pihoker, Corresponding Author Catherine Pihoker catherine.pihoker@seattlechildrens.org Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington Correspondence Catherine Pihoker, Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington, 4800 Sand Point Way NE, Seattle, WA 98105, M/S OC.7.820. Email: catherine.pihoker@seattlechildrens.orgSearch for more papers by this authorGun Forsander, Gun Forsander Division of Diabetes, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg and The Queen Silvia Children's Hospital, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, SwedenSearch for more papers by this authorBereket Fantahun, Bereket Fantahun Department of Pediatrics and Child Health at Saint Paul's Hospital Millennium Medical College, Addis Ababa, EthiopiaSearch for more papers by this authorAnju Virmani, Anju Virmani Department of Pediatrics, Max, Pentamed and SL Jain Hospitals, Delhi, IndiaSearch for more papers by this authorSarah Corathers, Sarah Corathers Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OhioSearch for more papers by this authorPaul Benitez-Aguirre, Paul Benitez-Aguirre Sydney Medical School, Discipline of Child & Adolescent Health, The Children's Hospital at Westmead Clinical School Children's Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this authorJunfen Fu, Junfen Fu Children's Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorDavid M. Maahs, David M. Maahs orcid.org/0000-0002-4602-7909 Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University, Stanford, CaliforniaSearch for more papers by this author First published: 24 August 2018 https://doi.org/10.1111/pedi.12757Citations: 70Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume19, IssueS27Supplement: International Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Diabetes (ISPAD) Clinical Practice Consensus Guidelines 2018, 11–14 October 2018, Hyderabad, India. Guest Editor: David M. Maahs. Special Guest Editor: Mark SperlingOctober 2018Pages 84-104 RelatedInformation
Confidentiality and public interest disclosure: A framework to evaluate UK healthcare professional regulatory guidance

Paul Snelling,Oliver Quick

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/09685332221079124

2022-03-08

Medical Law International

Abstract:Confidentiality and disclosure of information in the public interest present difficult dilemmas for healthcare practitioners and call for clear legal and regulatory guidance. The common law duty of confidence, and established exceptions to it, are shaped by medical practice and detailed guidance produced by the General Medical Council. Guidance issued by other healthcare regulators in a highly fragmented environment is at best unclear and at worst inaccurate. This article assembles and justifies a framework of evaluation against which regulators’ guidance can be assessed, focussing on the specific issue of when the duty of confidentiality can be set aside in the public interest. Comparison of statutory regulators’ guidance reveals wide variation which creates uncertainty for practitioners confused by inconsistency between guidance documents. The results of this analysis raise questions about the relationship between common law and regulatory guidance, in particular, whether it is appropriate to recognize different standards for different healthcare professions. This article argues that there is an opportunity to correct this anomaly and ensure appropriate consistency as part of a wider review of healthcare professional regulation.
Whose responsibility is it to talk with children and young people about intersex/differences in sex development? Young people’s, caregivers’ and health professionals’ perspectives

Katrina Roen,Tove Lundberg,Peter Hegarty,Lih-Mei Liao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fruro.2023.1089198

2023-03-29

Frontiers in Urology

Abstract:Introduction Over the past two decades, there has been a shift from concealing diagnoses of sex development from impacted people to the broad principle of age-appropriate disclosure. This change is consistent with children’s rights and with general shifts towards giving children medical information and involving patients in medical decision-making. The present paper examines how health professionals, young people and caregivers with experience in this area talk about the process of telling children about a diagnosis relating to sex development. The focus is on (i) who is given the role of talking with children and young people about their medical condition and care in the context of a diagnosis relating to sex development and (ii) what strategies seem to work, and what dilemmas are encountered, in engaging children and young people in talk about their condition and healthcare. Method Qualitative semi-structured interviews were carried out with 32 health professionals, 28 caregivers and 12 young persons recruited in the UK and Sweden, and thematic analysis was undertaken. Results The analysis identifies strategies and dilemmas in communication and a widespread assumption that it is caregivers’ responsibility to talk with children / young people about the diagnosis. This assumption creates difficulties for all three parties. This paper raises concern about children / young people who, despite a more patient-centred care ethos, are nevertheless growing up with limited opportunities to learn to talk about intersex or differences in sex development with confidence. Discussion Learning to talk about this topic is one step towards shared decision-making in healthcare. A case is made for services to take clearer responsibility for developing a protocol for educating children and young people in ways that involve caregivers. Such a process would include relevant medical information as well as opportunities to explore preferred language and meaning and address concerns of living well with bodily differences.
Paediatric Nurses' Personal Accounts of Being Told Not to Disclose Information to Children With Serious Illness—An Interpretative Phenomenological Study

Mandy (Mervat) El Ali,Jenny O'Neill,Lynn Gillam

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.16596

IF: 3.057

2024-11-06

Journal of Advanced Nursing

Abstract:Aims To explore the experiences, and perceptions of nurses who are told to withhold clinical information from children diagnosed with serious illnesses. Design An interpretative qualitative phenomenological design was used for the study. Sampling was purposive and data were collected using semi‐structured interviews from nurses working in a paediatric setting within the preceding 5 years. Nurse‐participants described their personal experiences of withholding situations ('non‐disclosure directives'). Their accounts of specific examples of situations ('personal accounts') were extracted from the interview transcripts and analysed using inductive content analysis to identify patterns and concepts within the descriptions. Data management was supported using Dedoose. Setting Nurse‐participants were interviewed face‐to face and online between November 2019 and December 2020. Participants Twenty‐six Australian nurses who have cared for seriously ill children within the preceding 5 years participated in the study. Results Thirty‐nine accounts of non‐disclosure situations (personal accounts) were extracted from interview transcripts. Four types of non‐disclosure were identified in the personal accounts: withholding information, temporary withholding, lying and combined withholding/lying. The inductive content analysis identified three key aspects of nurse‐participants' accounts: beliefs and perceptions (about the child and parents), the nature of the experience and feelings about the experience. Discussion Moral distress occurred when nurses' actions conflicted with their moral values in response to a non‐disclosure directive, particularly when asked to directly lie to children. Nurses felt disempowered by the parent's authority and the institutional hierarchy that limited their ability to participate in discussions where a non‐disclosure directive was given. Conclusion and Impact Nurse‐participants were afforded a platform for reflection which proved valuable in allowing them to process their experiences in a non‐disclosure situation. Recommendations Nurses directed to withhold medical information from children should be afforded opportunities for reflection to mitigate moral distress. Nurses should be included in the planning of ethically appropriate responses to withholding directives.

nursing
Ethical issues in the daily medical care of children

R. Kurz,D. Gill,S. Mjones,Ethics Working Group of Confederation of European Specialists in Paediatrics,

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00431-005-0002-2

2005-10-12

European Journal of Pediatrics

Abstract:The main ethical imperative of all paediatric actions is the demand to do everything “in the best interests of children”. Relevant guidelines can be derived from the UN Declaration on the Rights of Children, whereupon every child has the fundamental right to life and dignity, and is entitled to optimal medical care. Paediatric care in general includes the responsibility to achieve the highest level of knowledge, consideration of the child-specific somatic, mental and social development, empathic and trustworthy communication with the child and parents, observance of the recommendations of the Charter of the Rights of Children in Hospital, and cooperation with experts in related professions. Good communication is based on respect for the dignity of the child as a person and on the use of child-specific language, recognizing the rights of the child to be involved in consent or assent. Good clinical practice dictates and demands high standards of practice in therapeutics, research and medical interventions involving children. Decision making in extreme situations with regard to continuation, withholding or withdrawing life supporting measures is amongst the most complex and ethically difficult tasks of a doctor. Ethical issues with regard to neglect, maltreatment, abuse and addictions involving children need scrupulous consideration. Paediatricians have a prime responsibility to promote and protect the well being of children.

pediatrics
How Do Paediatricians Manage Comfort with Uncertainty in Clinical Decision-Making

Colin J McMahon,Muirne Spooner,Matthew Sibbald,Maryam Asoodar

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/pme.1394

2024-10-22

Abstract:Background: While healthcare practice is inherently characterised by uncertainty, there is a paucity of formal curricular training to support comfort with uncertainty (CWU) in postgraduate training. Indeed, some evidence suggests medical training inherently conflicts with CWU in emphasizing pedagogies focussing on "fixing" the problem. While referral patterns increase significantly, dealing with uncertainty has direct implications for patient referral rates and use of valuable healthcare resources. Methods: Paediatricians in Ireland were invited to participate. Face-to-face interviews were conducted after participants watched videos of varied clinician-patient interactions.. Two researchers independently analysed the collected data using thematic analysis. Triangulation and member checking was performed to ensure validity of findings. A reflection journal documented the research journey. Results: Thirty four paediatricians participated. Five themes were identified: the interplay between quality of information, uncertainty and decision-making, confidence in clinical assessment and first-hand patient evaluation, anxiety and fear experienced by medical professionals when dealing with complex and serious conditions, strategies employed by medical professionals in managing their own uncertainty and the impact of societal and parental expectations on medical decision-making. These are moderated by a number of factors, most significantly the child's caregivers' comfort with doctors reassurance (CDR). Enacted management will diverge from the consultant's clinical plan when the caregiver's CDR cannot be satisfactorily supported. Discussion: Clinician CWU in the paediatric context is inextricably linked to caregiver CDR. The complexities and central importance of social context in understanding CWU has important implications for how we develop educational activities to support clinician CWU and patient/care-giver CDR. This may translate to efficient use of limited resources in healthcare settings.
Professional duties are now considered legal duties of care within genomic medicine

Middleton Anna,Patch Christine,Roberts Jonathan,Milne Richard,Costa Alessia,Robarts Lauren,Atutornu Jerome

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-020-0663-3

Abstract:The legal duty to protect patient confidentiality is common knowledge amongst healthcare professionals. However, what may not be widely known, is that this duty is not always absolute. In the United Kingdom, both the General Medical Council governing the practice of all doctors, as well as many other professional codes of practice recognise that, under certain circumstances, it may be appropriate to break confidentiality. This arises when there is a wider duty to protect the health of others, and when the risk of non-disclosure outweighs the potential harm from breaking confidentiality. We discuss this situation specifically in relation to genomic medicine where relatives in a family may have differing views on the sharing of familial genetic information. Overruling a patient's wishes is predicated on balancing the duty of care towards the patient versus protecting their relative from serious harm. We discuss the practice implications of a pivotal legal case that concluded recently in the High Court of Justice in England and Wales, ABC v St Georges Healthcare NHS Trust & Ors. Professional guidance is already clear that genetic healthcare professionals must undertake a balancing exercise to weigh up contradictory duties of care. However, the judge has provided a new legal weighting to these professional duties: 'The scope of the duty extends not only to conducting the necessary balancing exercise but also to acting in accordance with its outcome' [1: 189]. In the context of genomic medicine, this has important consequences for clinical practice.
How did whistleblowing and the duty of candour get onto the agenda of the British national health service

Martin Powell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JHOM-07-2023-0217

2024-06-25

Abstract:Purpose: This paper compares how the two interacting themes of "Whistleblowing" or "Speaking Up" and the duty of candour (DoC), which are both concerned with safety and quality improvement in health care, got onto the agenda of the British National Health Service (NHS). Design/methodology/approach: It uses the approach of multiple streams and the methodology of interpretive content analysis in a deductive approach that focusses on both manifest and latent content. It examines official documents that discuss the DoC or whistleblowing or cognate terms in connection with the British NHS from 1999 to 2019. Findings: The main conceptual finding, which mirrors many previous studies, is that it seems difficult to operationalise many of the sub-components of the multiple streams approach. The main empirical finding points to the "focusing event" of the Francis Report into the Mid Staffordshire Trust of 2013 and the importance of its Chair, Sir Robert Francis, as a policy entrepreneur. Originality/value: This is one of the first studies to focus on both issues of whistleblowing and the DoC and the first to compare them through the lens of the multiple streams approach. It has two main conceptual advantages over most previous studies in the field: it compares whistleblowing and the duty of candour rather than the dominant approach of a single case study and explores the different outcomes of failed as well as successful couplings of the streams.
Editorial: The Cass Review – implications and reassurance for practitioners

Hilary Cass

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/camh.12723

2024-08-20

Child and Adolescent Mental Health

Abstract:This editorial perspective summarises the key findings of the independent review of gender identity services for children and young people commissioned by the National Health Service (NHS) in England (the Cass Review). Although the evidence underpinning endocrine interventions in this group of young people remains weak, there is much that mental health practitioners can do to improve their well‐being and support their families. The controversies surrounding this group of young people have disempowered local professionals, who have lost confidence in their ability to provide care for them. The reality is that CAMHS professionals already have all the necessary transferrable skills and with a small amount of top up training, they can make a profound difference to the lives of this vulnerable group, which has been marginalised in our healthcare system.

pediatrics,psychiatry,psychology, clinical
Exploring the implementation of key nursing roles in children's cardiac services

Kerry Louise Gaskin,Lynda Shaughnessy,Amanda Daniels

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7748/ncyp.2023.e1495

2024-07-04

Abstract:Background: Children's cardiac nursing roles have changed over the past decade. Royal College of Nursing (RCN) guidance and NHS England standards have been published with the aim of standardising and enhancing nursing care for children and young people with congenital heart disease (CHD) and their families. Aim: To explore the breath of implementation of key nursing roles in children's cardiac services across the UK and Ireland and to determine whether the roles met the RCN guidance and the NHS England standards. Method: A cross-sectional survey design was used. The 150 members of the Congenital Cardiac Nurses Association (CCNA) were invited via email to participate and were sent a link to an online survey. Findings: Of the 150 potential respondents, 31 completed the survey. Overall, respondents believed that the RCN guidance had been implemented effectively and that children's cardiac nursing roles matched the RCN's example job descriptions. Respondents' comments suggested that implementation of the NHS England standards had been challenging and that progress in setting up key roles such as lead nurse, cardiac nurse educator and children's cardiac nurse specialist had been slow. Respondents felt that political and financial factors adversely affected recruitment. Conclusion: Since publication of the NHS England standards there has been some progress in the implementation, in children's cardiac services, of key nursing roles such as lead nurse and innovative nursing roles such as advanced nurse practitioner and research nurse. The findings of this study have informed the latest edition of the RCN guidance, which now includes the role of senior research nurse.
Senior stakeholder views on policies to foster a culture of openness in the English National Health Service: a qualitative interview study

Graham Paul Martin,Sarah Chew,Mary Dixon-Woods

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0141076818815509

Abstract:Objectives: To examine the experiences of clinical and managerial leaders in the English healthcare system charged with implementing policy goals of openness, particularly in relation to improving employee voice. Design: Semi-structured qualitative interviews. Setting: National Health Service, regulatory and third-sector organisations in England. Participants: Fifty-one interviewees, including senior leaders in healthcare organisations (38) and policymakers and representatives of other relevant regulatory, legal and third-sector organisations (13). Main outcome measures: Not applicable. Results: Participants recognised the limitations of treating the new policies as an exercise in procedural implementation alone and highlighted the need for additional 'cultural engineering' to engender change. However, formidable impediments included legacies of historical examples of detriment arising from speaking up, the anxiety arising from increased monitoring and the introduction of a legislative imperative and challenges in identifying areas characterised by a lack of openness and engaging with them to improve employee voice. Beyond healthcare organisations themselves, recent legal cases and examples of 'blacklisting' of whistle-blowers served to reinforce the view that giving voice to concerns was a risky endeavour. Conclusions: Implementation of procedural interventions to support openness is challenging but feasible; engineering cultural change is much more daunting, given deep-rooted and pervasive assumptions about what should be said and the consequences of mis-speaking, together with ongoing ambivalences in the organisational environment about the propriety of giving voice to concerns.
When Parents Request Nondisclosure: Rights of Adolescents to Access Their Health Information and Implications of the 21st Century Cures Act Final Rule

Edward McArdle,Karen L Teelin,Adrienne Borschuk,Amy E Caruso Brown

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/729413

Abstract:AbstractDespite broad ethical consensus supporting developmentally appropriate disclosure of health information to older children and adolescents, cases in which parents and caregivers request nondisclosure continue to pose moral dilemmas for clinicians. State laws vary considerably regarding adolescents' rights to autonomy, privacy, and confidentiality, with many states not specifically addressing adolescents' right to their own healthcare information. The requirements of the 21st Century Cures Act have raised important ethical concerns for pediatricians and adolescent healthcare professionals regarding the protection of adolescent privacy and confidentiality, given requirements that chart notes and results be made readily available to patients via electronic portals. Less addressed have been the implications of the act for adolescents' access to their health information, since many healthcare systems' electronic portals are available to patients beginning at age 12, sometimes requiring that the patients themselves authorize their parents' access to the same information. In this article, we present a challenging case of protracted disagreement about an adolescent's right to honest information regarding his devastating prognosis. We then review the legal framework governing adolescents' rights to their own healthcare information, the limitations of ethics consultation to resolve such disputes, and the potential for the Cures Act's impact on electronic medical record systems to provide one form of resolution. We conclude that although parents in cases like the one presented here have the legal right to consent to medical treatment on their children's behalf, they do not have a corresponding right to direct the withholding of medical information from the patient.
Respecting autonomy in young people

R Beach,R Proops

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/pgmj.2008.074781

2009-04-01

Postgraduate Medical Journal

Abstract:Paediatricians have a duty to protect the life and health of their patients and to respect their autonomy. Usually, there will be no conflict between these duties. Both children and parents want effective care and agree to the medical interventions that that are most likely to provide it. However, when children refuse or resist such interventions, it may be unclear when the duty to protect trumps the duty to respect. This is because children may have differing levels of autonomy, sometimes making them competent to make medical decisions for themselves and at other times not. Further, there may be conflict between the children and their parents in such circumstances. Children may refuse treatments that parents desire or vice versa. Sometimes paediatricians may agree with the child in the face of legal powers of parental guardianship. At other times they may agree with the parents, facing the prospect of forcing treatment on an unwilling child with potentially devastating psychological consequences. This paper will explore this potential ethical and legal minefield by evaluating some practical clinical cases based on the experiences of the primary author. It provides a range of examples of these different types of conflicts, including especially problematic "hard cases" that concern the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment and child protection. The goal of the article is not simply to morally and legally outline the boundaries of such tensions in paediatric care. It also provides concrete advice about how they should best be resolved in everyday clinical practice.

medicine, general & internal
Factors influencing general practitioners decisions to refer Paediatric patients to the emergency department: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

Ciara Conlon,Emma Nicholson,Beatriz Rodríguez-Martin,Roisin O'Donovan,Aoife De Brún,Thérѐse McDonnell,Gerard Bury,Eilish McAuliffe

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-020-01277-9

2020-10-16

Abstract:Background: Clinical guidelines are integral to a general practitioner's decision to refer a paediatric patient to emergency care. The influence of non-clinical factors must also be considered. This review explores the non-clinical factors that may influence general practitioners (GPs) when deciding whether or not to refer a paediatric patient to the Emergency Department (ED). Methods: A systematic review of peer-reviewed literature published from August 1980 to July 2019 was conducted to explore the non-clinical factors that influence GPs' decision-making in referring paediatric patients to the emergency department. The results were synthesised using a narrative approach. Results: Seven studies met the inclusion criteria. Non-clinical factors relating to patients, GPs and health systems influence GPs decision to refer children to the ED. GPs reported parents/ caregivers influence, including their perception of severity of child's illness, parent's request for onward referral and GPs' appraisal of parents' ability to cope. Socio-economic status, GPs' aversion to risk and system level factors such as access to diagnostics and specialist services also influenced referral decisions. Conclusions: A myriad of non-clinical factors influence GP referrals of children to the ED. Further research on the impact of non-clinical factors on clinical decision-making can help to elucidate patterns and trends of paediatric healthcare and identify areas for intervention to utilise resources efficiently and improve healthcare delivery.
Evaluation of healthcare professionals' experiences of taking telephone calls from parents of children with congenital heart disease. A risky business

K Gaskin,A Seale,J Menzies

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/13674935231222943

2024-01-05

Journal of Child Health Care

Abstract:Journal of Child Health Care, Ahead of Print. The Congenital Heart Disease Standards for England indicate that parents and children should have access to a 24-h telephone advice service, however, little is known about existing services. This paper presents phase two of a mixed-methods service evaluation, which aimed to evaluate staff experiences of telephone communication with these parents. All nursing and support staff in a single specialist children's cardiac surgical centre were invited to participate in an online survey during July–November 2019. Data were descriptively and thematically analysed. Participants (N = 39) were predominantly nurses (n = 32, 82%) with 64.1% (n = 25) working in the speciality >10 years. Positive experiences included: signposting and preventing further deterioration; supporting families to get expert advice quickly; providing reassurance. Challenging experiences included: offering advice without being able to see the child, dealing with telephone calls alongside busy workload; and parents running out of medications and telephoning out of hours. In conclusion, taking telephone calls were perceived to be time consuming and are potentially high risk. A standardised approach to assessment, intervention and documentation was deemed necessary. Implementation of an updated parental early warning tool was recommended, along with staff and parental education.

nursing,pediatrics
Familial genetic risks: how can we better navigate patient confidentiality and appropriate risk disclosure to relatives?

Edward S Dove,Vicky Chico,Michael Fay,Graeme Laurie,Anneke M Lucassen,Emily Postan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2018-105229

2019-05-23

Journal of Medical Ethics

Abstract:This article investigates a high-profile and ongoing dilemma for healthcare professionals (HCPs), namely whether the existence of a (legal) duty of care to genetic relatives of a patient is a help or a hindrance in deciding what to do in cases where a patient’s genetic information may have relevance to the health of the patient’s family members. The English case ABC v St George’s Healthcare NHS Trust and others considered if a duty of confidentiality owed to the patient and a putative duty of care to the patient’s close relatives could coexist in this context. This article examines whether embracing the concept of coexisting duties could enable HCPs to respect duties in line with their clinical judgement, thereby providing legal support and clarity to professionals to allow them to provide the best possible genetics service to both the patient and their family. We argue that these dual duties, framed as a novel, composite duty to consider the interests of genetic relatives, could allow HCPs to exercise and act on their professional judgements about the relative value of information to family members, without fears of liability for negligence or breach of confidence.

ethics,medical ethics,social issues,social sciences, biomedical
Perspectives from primary health care providers on their roles for supporting adolescents and young adults transitioning from pediatric services

Kyleigh Schraeder,Gina Dimitropoulos,Kerry McBrien,Jessica Yijia Li,Susan Samuel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-020-01189-8

2020-07-13

Abstract:Background: Transitioning from pediatric care to adult-oriented care at age 18 (the age of transfer in most countries and jurisdictions) is a complex process for adolescents and young adults affected by chronic physical health and/or mental health conditions. The role of primary health care (PHC) providers for this population is poorly understood. Perspectives from these providers, such as family physicians and other members of the primary care team, have not been explored in depth. Methods: A total of 18 participants (e.g., family physicians, social workers, nurses) were recruited from 6 Primary Care Networks in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Semi-structured individual interviews were conducted, and transcribed verbatim. A qualitative description approach was used to analyze the data, and included thematic analysis. Results: Five distinct, yet overlapping, roles of primary health care providers for adolescents and young adults transitioning to adult care resulted from our analysis: (1) being the "common thread" (continuous accessible care); (2) caring for the "whole patient" (comprehensive care); (3) "knowing families" (family-partnered care); (4) "empowering" adolescents and young adults to develop "personal responsibility" (developmentally-appropriate care); and (5) "quarterbacking" care (coordination of specialist and/or community-based care). Participants identified potential benefits of these roles for adolescents and young adults transitioning to adult care, and barriers in practice (e.g., lack of time, having minimal involvement in pediatric care). Conclusions: Input from family physicians, who follow their patients across the lifespan and provide the majority of primary care in Canada, are critical for informing and refining recommended transition practices. Our findings provide insights, from PHC providers themselves, to bolster the rationale for primary care involvement during transitions from pediatric specialty and community-based care for AYAs. Solutions to overcome barriers for integrating primary care and specialty care for adolescents and young adults need to be identified, and tested, with input from key stakeholders.
New guidance for self-harm: an opportunity not to be missed: commentary, Mughal et al

Faraz Mughal,Fiona M. Burton,Harriet Fletcher,Karen Lascelles,Rory C. O'Connor,Sarah Rae,Alex B. Thomson,Nav Kapur

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.2024.33

2024-10-16

The British Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract:We thank Professor House for his thoughtful and interesting response. We agree it's helpful to define and unpick what terms mean. Empathy, with its origins from the Greek 'empatheia' [physical affection, passion] can also be defined as 'the ability to understand and appreciate another person's feelings'. 1 We feel it is certainly possible for clinicians to recognise and appreciate the feelings of an individual service user but as House notes there are often gaps in clinicians' understanding of the functions of self-harm. We would also agree that postgraduate training has a key role to play here especially when co-designed and delivered with lived experience expertise. In our editorial, we outlined the importance of concepts related to empathy such as compassionate care (can be defined as 'the feeling or emotion, when a person is moved by the suffering or distress of another, and by the desire to relieve it' 2 and can include showing sympathy and concern for others), and non-judgemental care. None of this is new – compassion and empathy are the focus of a rich body of literature that investigates everything from their neuroscientific basis to their social and clinical aspects, but these can be better ingrained into psychiatric practice. Reference Crawford, Brown, Kvangarsnes and Gilbert 3, Reference Stevens and Taber 4 We liked the three attributes House suggested because we think their acquisition will improve patient care and experience. But they go far beyond empathy and stray into other aspects of care which we tried as a Committee to cover in the full guidance. 5 Producing national guidelines is never straightforward and ultimately they remain (as the name suggests) a guide, rather than mandatory instructions. In this context, we would argue that there is room for 'blurry, feel-good' concepts such as empathy, and of course sympathy, as well as more concrete curriculum specifications.

psychiatry
A European Society of Paediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care (ESPNIC) survey of European critical care management of young people

R Tuckwell,D Wood,S Mansfield-Sturgess,J Brierley

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00431-016-2815-6

Abstract:Adolescents have specific healthcare needs distinct from adults or younger children secondary to anatomical, physiological and socio-behavioural differences. Healthcare providers have been slow to address this, leading the UK Department of Health (2011) to publish 'You're Welcome' quality criteria for services for young people. (In the UK, the term young people is preferred to adolescent.) These generic criteria poorly fit the critical care environment, omitting key issues whilst insisting upon irrelevant standards. But as young people are infrequent patients for any individual unit, the research base to guide optimal management is poor and we could find no international or national guidance. Together with the hospital's young people's group, our intensive care team identified six areas important for critically ill young people, which are the 6Ps: privacy, permission, deep vein thrombosis (DVT) prophylaxis, personal life, puberty and practical issues. We then surveyed practice across Europe regarding these themes. Fifty-four hospitals from 16 countries participated, demonstrating disparate practice and widely differing policies to meet the requirements of critically ill young people. Conclusion: There is little consistency of practice in some areas such as pregnancy testing, DVT prophylaxis or partner visiting, whereas in others, such as involving young people in healthcare decisions where possible, practice is consistently good. Further research should focus on the young people's experience of critical care to refine healthcare policy. What is Known: • Adolescents have distinct health and psychosocial needs that are often poorly catered for in contemporary healthcare settings, including critical care. • As adolescents are infrequent patients for any intensive care unit, there is a poor research base and essentially no guidance, regarding optimal care. What is New: • We developed a mnemonic with adolescents and ICU staff to improve healthcare delivery to young people in critical care, the 6Ps: privacy, permission, DVT prophylaxis, personal life, puberty and practical issues. • Delivery of the adolescents' critical care varies greatly both between and within countries; the 6Ps offers a method of standardising and improving this across different countries.

The duties of candour: what do they mean to paediatricians?

Admitting when Mistakes Are Made

ISPAD Clinical Practice Consensus Guidelines 2018: The delivery of ambulatory diabetes care to children and adolescents with diabetes

Confidentiality and public interest disclosure: A framework to evaluate UK healthcare professional regulatory guidance

Whose responsibility is it to talk with children and young people about intersex/differences in sex development? Young people’s, caregivers’ and health professionals’ perspectives

Paediatric Nurses' Personal Accounts of Being Told Not to Disclose Information to Children With Serious Illness—An Interpretative Phenomenological Study

Ethical issues in the daily medical care of children

How Do Paediatricians Manage Comfort with Uncertainty in Clinical Decision-Making

Professional duties are now considered legal duties of care within genomic medicine

How did whistleblowing and the duty of candour get onto the agenda of the British national health service

Editorial: The Cass Review – implications and reassurance for practitioners

Exploring the implementation of key nursing roles in children's cardiac services

Senior stakeholder views on policies to foster a culture of openness in the English National Health Service: a qualitative interview study

When Parents Request Nondisclosure: Rights of Adolescents to Access Their Health Information and Implications of the 21st Century Cures Act Final Rule

Respecting autonomy in young people

Factors influencing general practitioners decisions to refer Paediatric patients to the emergency department: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

Evaluation of healthcare professionals' experiences of taking telephone calls from parents of children with congenital heart disease. A risky business

Familial genetic risks: how can we better navigate patient confidentiality and appropriate risk disclosure to relatives?

Perspectives from primary health care providers on their roles for supporting adolescents and young adults transitioning from pediatric services

New guidance for self-harm: an opportunity not to be missed: commentary, Mughal et al

A European Society of Paediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care (ESPNIC) survey of European critical care management of young people